Could not download file: This paper is available to authorised users only.


A. Oulanov, A. Fadairo, Y. Novitskaya, L. Knizhnik

Medgar Evers College of the City University of New York (UNITED STATES)
The present exploratory research in the field of Human –Computer Interaction is a paper in a string of research reports and presentations that examines work and functionality among the electronic and human behavioral logical systems from the point of view of some formal logic approaches. In addition to familiar digital and analog paradigms, the current logical approaches entail tertiary, three-valued, or trivalent (3VL) logic, developed further into the quinary (5VL), and over the long term, into the continuous multi-valued logical systems.

Analogies between the human system of motivation and the work of sequential logic circuit with the memory and feedback are suggested and examined. Tables for the tertiary and quinary logic solutions are created, and examples from the perspective of Kretschmer’s system of psychological differentiation are explained. An attempt is made to examine an emotional component in the motivation in a complex decision-making system in the realm of the cognitive and quantitative assessments of the probabilities of positive and negative outcomes in a continuous logical system.

While training our students in the area of constructing formal algorithms based on the examples of human behavior in a situation of a basic drive like thirst, we use as an example an imaginary elderly gentleman with a history of memory problems who can find his way around various objects and phenomena only following formal logical instructions and, therefore, is less susceptible to the use of heuristic approaches. His behavior is examined from the perspective of algorithmic differences and similarities between the behavioral system of a human organism and systems in the field of information technology.

While digital world functions according to binary logic, it would be barely possibly to explain human behavior in binary algorithms beyond mere navigating around the physical objects, because of the complexity of human actions and pattern recognitions. Hence, the algorithmization of the processes in human decision-making called for more complex algorithmic approaches. Also, if human algorithms are compared to computer, human decisions become more congruent with the decisions made by a machine when they are devoid of emotional influences, and Limbic system’s circuitry influence is not a part of the equation. In other words, this parallel between the human and computer brains’ decision-making is more obvious when the decisions are made on the level of frontal cortex only, the part of the brain responsible for rational thinking. It becomes significantly more difficult to keep this parallel when we have the Limbic system’s circuitry influencing or even overriding the frontal cortex circuitry. The parallels between the human and machine brains phase out and become even less determinable when the human brain starts utilizing heuristics.